NYTimes Lies (Again) To Push Its Liberal-Biased Positions

[Ricter]

It appears at least one Fox News writer didn't bother checking, either.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/18/guns-navy-yard-and-media-echoes-anguished-debate/

'"In fact, as the New York Times reports, Alexis “test fired an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week but was stopped from buying one because state law there prohibits the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers, according to two senior law enforcement officials.”

'So in this narrow instance, at least, existing gun control laws worked.'

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Ricter:

'So in this narrow instance, at least, existing gun control laws worked.'

Riiiiight, only 12 dead this time. It was the federal background check that failed.

 

[Max E.]

Quote from Ricter:


'So in this narrow instance, at least, existing gun control laws worked.'

Actually its the complete opposite, if infact this guy was blocked from buying an AR-15, so instead he used a shotgun, doesnt it prove that if the government bans AR-15's people will simply use another weapon?

It proves the futility of gun laws.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

Actually its the complete opposite, if infact this guy was blocked from buying an AR-15, so instead he used a shotgun, doesnt it prove that if the government bans AR-15's people will simply use another weapon?

It proves the futility of gun laws.

Leave it to Ricter to get it completely wrong - again.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Lucrum:

Leave it to Ricter to get it completely wrong - again.

He's only interested in arguing for his team, so he's going to get lots of stuff wrong, unfortunately.

 

[LEAPup]

The NY times should face ethics violations for publish this kind of horse shit. Will anyone hold their feet to the fire, and file the complaint? I doubt it.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

Actually its the complete opposite, if infact this guy was blocked from buying an AR-15, so instead he used a shotgun, doesnt it prove that if the government bans AR-15's people will simply use another weapon?

It proves the futility of gun laws.

What we don't know is how many he would have killed if he had the AR-15 instead.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Ricter:

What we don't know is how many he would have killed if he had the AR-15 instead.

We do know he wouldn't have killed anyone at the Navy yard had his federal background check served it's purpose.

Which reminds me, at least half the mass shooters in the last several years were known mental cases.

A significant number of school shooting are perpetrated by kids on or withdrawing from ADD drugs.

And the left is obsessed with guns and guns laws?

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from Lucrum:

We do know he wouldn't have killed anyone at the Navy yard had his federal background check served it's purpose.

Which reminds me, at least half the mass shooters in the last several years were known mental cases.

A significant number of school shooting are perpetrated by kids on or withdrawing from ADD drugs.

And the left is obsessed with guns and guns laws?

The sick bastard tyrants in Washington use the mass shootings for one reason, and one reason only: unarmed people can be controlled by the government. The demonazis would love to START with the AR-15. Problem is once they start, they won't stop. The dirty sons of bitches!!!!!

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from LEAPup:

The sick bastard tyrants in Washington use the mass shootings for one reason, and one reason only: unarmed people can be controlled by the government. The demonazis would love to START with the AR-15.




Problem is once they start, they won't stop. The dirty sons of bitches!!!!!

They've already started, twenty two thousand federal state and local firearms laws ago.